* Cisco's arguments for a single-vendor integrated network
Last time, we began a discussion of the pros and cons of using a single vendor for your entire network infrastructure. We’ll continue the “pro” side of this discussion with more comments from Ben Goldman, Cisco director of marketing, network systems, as he explains the four reasons that single-vendor networks are optimal (see the first two reasons in the last newsletter).
Goldman writes: “3. Acceleration of Innovation Adoption: Customers rely on the ability of the network to deliver critical business needs – which is often their competitive advantage. Typically, these services are not point products but fully integrated solutions, such as VoIP. Multiple vendor designs typically reduce the overall network service delivery to a “lowest common denominator,” limiting or delaying the enterprise business’ ability to use the network for innovation. Furthermore, tracking the implementations of services across multiple vendors to leverage any new features is time consuming and requires additional manpower.
“4. Other Network High Availability Considerations: Maximizing network uptime is critical to maintaining business functions. The single vendor design – in addition to minimizing the complexity which in and of itself helps protect network availability – ensures the common implementation of network-wide protocols responsible for delivering end-to-end services. It also allows the enterprise to utilize that vendor’s “best practice” designs, which are validated through rigorous testing. Many of the issues that result in security vulnerability notifications are typically industry-wide issues – for example, recent vulnerabilities found within SNMP. While these vulnerabilities may be common to all vendor implementations due to the design of the specific protocol involved, the challenge comes in the response time to fix them. In a multiple vendor implementation, there will certainly be greater delay in resolution deployment than in a single vendor deployment. This is exacerbated by the fact that not all vendors announce vulnerabilities and resolutions in the same way.”
Goldman also offered some ideas on how to select a vendor to reduce risk. He explains: “Below are six key tips to help identify a vendor that will optimize the above points, reduce the overall risk in the network, and maximize availability:
“1. Look for well-defined and detailed design validation programs that include:
– High availability and network security
– Design guidance based on large-scale validation tests
– Impact to enterprise applications and other advanced technologies, such as unified communications, application acceleration
– Specific architectures to address enterprise customer needs for different network requirements, with an integrated approach
2. Ask for experience in deployment of the recommended architecture.
3. Evaluate advisory processes (i.e. First and CERT.Org members, how do they treat internally found defects, vulnerability testing in the release/regression process)
4. Support organization and coverage across your enterprise
– Account coverage focused on enterprise, with an understanding of applications and business requirements
5. Channel partner community trained to support vendor’s equipment.
6. Vendor’s financial strength.”
Many thank to Goldman for sharing these comments. As mentioned previously, there are more details on this topic available at Webtorials.
Next week, we’ll focus on the opposite side of the argument with Nortel’s Tony Rybczynski, director strategic enterprise technologies, who discusses the advantages of using a variety of network vendors within your infrastructure.
